Can a super realistic FPS games succeed?

[aklo]

I think there are none exist.

Basically it should support hundreds of players in a map simulating soldiers between 2 armies. 1 shot should mean 1 kill or even render the target immovable. 2nd shot should kill the target already...

Current FPS games...is just too unrealistic.

There are also problems associated with too realistic games...you die too quickly and the games just get too bored but i'm sure there must be work around.

I got this idea from "Saving private Ryan" ....you see how the soldiers got off from their "Boat" and instantly a bunch of them got cut down by machine guns. The only way is to give covering fire and have another group flank them from the left and right which the middle group should keep the enemies behind the trench busy.

[eksasol]

The technology is very good now with the physic, such as HL2, but the reason why the game is still arcade-ish despite good physic is because it needs to appeal to the mass. To answer your question, no in term of profit, if you want to maximize your sale revenues you do not make a realistic video game. Some of my favorite fps in term of realistic gameplay, though not realistic physic engine are Deus Ex and Thief, Chronicles of Riddick as well, though good games, not that popular.

There has to be creativity involved, merge these realistic gameplay with the environment. For example, the character should be able to slip through a half opened door. Enemy's acoustic awareness is another element. Warren Spector said design your game to be 3D, otherwise make a 2D games. Most popular fps are run and gun games.

When you mention you die too quickly from one shot kill shot. I am pretty sure you can die too in real life from one shot, if not laying there screaming. That sounds realistic to me. It is not feasible to have 400 players in one server, few people have the connection to host the server so it would lag. It would be technically difficult to manage. How area the admins going to manage all the people so they don't abuse. And would you like to read 400 people typing or talk on the mic at the same time?

For example, the map Strand in the game Day of Defeat Source (you can probably find video of it from Youtube). If you put 400 people in it, it would be chaos and you get 200 German shooting at you with MG40s, then you can spend a couple hours trying to get off the beach. It would be no fun and people will leave the server, and even with only 30 people in the server people leaves anyway because they are getting owned by the German team. I rather not play the map for longer than 30minutes. But there are people who play in servers that run the same map 24/7, and you see them playing in same server everyday for 4 years. (MMORPG anyone?)

So there has to be some really creative things done for that to be possible. Generally an online strategy FPS where one player control a group of automated soldiers compete with another player makes more sense.

Another good team based HL2 mod beside DODS that you can check out is Insurgency, which is a free mod. When you search for servers to join, there are "realism" servers that modify things a bit to make the game feel more realistic, but actually this term is widely abused and it doesn't have much merit. Some of the servers have players who serve in the military so they can be quite challenging as well, and if you are not very good, prepare to get low score ratio.

I am more interested in what they're going to do with these virtual 3D hologram stuff. You can find a better forum for fps games discussion though.

[mastablasta]

I think certain games form Delta force series have 100+ players. don't know how realistic they are... but if they are anything like the first two games then it might be what you are looking for.

Edit this is the one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Operations

For example, the map Strand in the game Day of Defeat Source (you can probably find video of it from Youtube). If you put 400 people in it, it would be chaos and you get 200 German shooting at you with MG40s, then you can spend a couple hours trying to get off the beach. It would be no fun and people will leave the server, and even with only 30 people in the server people leaves anyway because they are getting owned by the German team. I rather not play the map for longer than 30minutes. But there are people who play in servers that run the same map 24/7, and you see them playing in same server everyday for 4 years. (MMORPG anyone?)

Why dont' they limit the number of people that can get an MG?

[Rustybolts]

what about ARMA or Operation Flashpoint

[Ferrat]

CS is somewhat more realistic but not much compared to many other games when it comes to dmg at least, but there are some more problems then just a reality simulation trying to mimic the real world, the input has to change, the mouse and keyboard is massively inferior to the body itself which would create a gap, also simulating actual battle would require it to actually simulate everything, internal organs, muscles, adrenaline etc would all make a difference when getting shot, also aiming would be much harder, shooting a moving target 10 meters away that's moving is extremely hard even with training.

What you would need is a 0 ping body-input system connected to a simulation that takes exactly everything in to account etc, without a Star Trek type holodeck or something like it you can forget a super realistic FPS.

[_h_]

America's Army is realistic, and it's succeeding.

[Epicnessism]

well, there are CURRENTLY no realistic games out there. i agree that profits harrow the making of realistic games because realistic games do not sell very well. but, if you could take all the realistic elements of war and creatively weave them into a good story, then bingo, bestselling game. people say that realistic games arnt that fun. that is true, but obviously, if its realistic, its gonna be hard and and youre gonna die fast.
some things that will make games more realistic and to keep people from not playing:

actual body armor. not the kind in games that give you AC, but if someone were to shoot you in the helmet or chest, you have a chance of not dieing, just falling down and get back up.

interactive maps, aka physics of the map. i know bf3 and other games already have this but making the explosions and demolition
according to what hits the buildings is hard.

no ammo count. in real life do they really give you a freaking status bar telling you how many rounds you have? no. what they should have though, is a number saying how many magazines you have left. also, they should have 31 rounds if they didnt finish the previous mag and they shouldnt have to pull the bolt feed again unless they've run out.

real suppressor sounds. in most fps games, the suppressor sounds are too fake, also, in CoD, it makes you stealthy, i agree that being stealthy is the whole point of the suppressor, but make it more realistic. where if you shoot someone with a suppressor from 10 feet away, the guy standing 2 feet next to him, should hear you and maybe see your muzzle flash.

real time reload and gun draw. in many games, you can change guns and reload at impossible speeds. for ex. the quick knife in many popular games. i can understand quickly pulling a knife from ur vest, but what first, ur hand is on ur gun, then you pull the knife, then you kill, and put it back, and take hold of your gun, thats more than 3/4 of a second. also, in many games, when you switch primary and sometiems secondary guns, its way to fast. in real life you actually have to put your gun away or at least sling it behind you, and then reach for your other gun, that can take(depending on guns) anywhere from 2 seconds to 5 or 10 seconds.

more grenades damnit!! in many games, they only give you one or two grenades. i understand why, otherwise you'd just go from room to room lobbing nades. but in reality, with lots of buildings and a huge map, and most likely vehichles, you should have anywhere from 4-8 grenades. (depending on how you outfit urself)

real recoil on guns. in some games, there is almost no recoil. in some games there is too much recoil. but the too much recoil games are usually more accurate. recoil plays a big factor in realisism.

[mastablasta]

have you tried red orchestra? i only played the old mod for UT2004 not the new separate games. they don't have ammo count, reloading the rifle sort of takes time. aiming is ironsight only. there is substantial recoil and also damage. so moving in propper rifle formaiton is important.

you are also limited in class (probably still in newer versions).

though no destructable environemtn i believe...

[allocateB]

People sit around and complain about not having good realistic military simulators, but no one ever looks at the ArmA games. Go out and buy yourself ArmA 2: Operation Arrowhead, you will be pleased, that's a fact.

[mastablasta]

ARMA2 is actually free to play (limited to only some SP missions and no mods allowed in the free game). MP is the same. they also have a torrent downlaod for those with a bit slower connections.

i already downloaded it but haven't got arround to try it. hopefully there is time this weekend. there is an interesting Youtube video with 1500 bot AI players fighting it out :-)

biggest problme with these "realistic" shooter is that peoply that play MP games are mostly quite limited in their brain capacity (talking about public servers here ofcourse) . for them arcade style, where they can go pixel hunting with sniper rifle in 3D shooting galery is better suited. they would die far too often.

for example i was playing world of tanks a bit lately. i mean sometimes when there is a little team ork it is quite fun. while othertimes i mean... how can they be so stupid? instead of spreadign out into a line they formed a column in the street to be picked off one by one by oposing team. in addition they drive back and forth (avoiding the hit?!) and in doing so get in the line of fire of other team mates as well as not avoiding at all since the enmy just moves the turret and bangs them.

ot they hide in bush and shoot. in the game you position has a high chance to be revealed if oyu shoot. so instead of just shoot and move they just stay there so others can kill them. or the best one is when they rush foward only to be owned by well set antitank gun ambush. why this is stupid - because the game itself tells you numerous time not to do that. and yet ...

another thing in other Team FPS you wait for enemy in ambush set up nicely and then one decides they can make a kill so open fire and reveals the others.

or in the unrealisting ones where they do bunny hoping or just runnning arround with no cover (i guess the game allows that since it takesso many hits to kill).

CS realistic game? really? the new one? maybe. i haven't played it but when you say CS it reminds me of the old HL mod and how the bullets stop you from turning and how you can kill someone at a distance with weak gun like that. since there is also no bullet drop in that one.

the most i hate is "snipers" where actually they are just pixel hunting. usually it's is just made too easy. snipers are usually countered with some weavy weapons. but use a missile weapon on them and they start complaining (been kicked numerous times form Wolfenstein: ET public servers for their complaints. it was ok for them to just sit in one place shooting others, while if you shot back with panzerfaust they complained.

[kenji_03]

Keep an eye out on "FireFall" for the mass number of players in an FPS.

If you're looking for something realistic AND fun check out Farcry 2.

The reason we don't have realism in FPS games (or games in general) is because it isn't fun to die of gang green or to have your foot shot off and have to lay on the ground until you bleed to death (that'll take about 35 minutes of just waiting for the screen to fade to black).

Also, Video games are about escapism, and few people want to excape to a world where shooting people is as "not fun" as it is in the real world.

[thatguruguy]

In order to be "super realistic", you'd need a game where most of the time you're doing nothing, and then suddenly you get involved in a firefight, get shot once, and then you never get to play the game again.

Or, your character is walking on patrol, and he either gets killed or maimed by a sniper, an IAD, a car bomb, or a woman who is walking along with her kids, and it turns out that they all have bombs strapped to them under their clothing.

Boy, that would be lots and lots of fun.

[|{urse]

The term "realistic" is kind of vague. But it seems the more realistic these games get the more successful they are with exception to one respect: Realistic modern combat is NOT fun, it's traumatic and sad. and bam, you're dead in seconds.

[|{urse]

I should really read the op and the lp before posting, looks like thatguruguy said basically the same thing. War is hell, not fun.

[Sages]

To be fair, Battlefield 3 hardcore servers are pretty 'real' and the problem realistic games would and do face is the players them selfs.. if there dont play realistically then the game would pretty much crumble. Thats what i think anyways :P